Technically, its not money/isk, but yeah, there would still be value there.
Im pretty sure it will be worthwhile to engage them with as few players as possible for actual reward, rather than just for removing the FOBs interference in the system.
I disagree, CCP makes like an advance every 2 years, its generally tiny, and one of the few advances was an adjunct to the mission running system (ie burners), and its still more or less a single player feature, and its still more or less suffering from better with an alt syndrome and the mechanism is still exactly level 4 missions. Here is an encounter gate, warp in, kill trigger npc, warp out.
Also just because we want more content, doesn’t mean they have to delete deds and L4s. It also doesn’t mean that the statistics for running them should drop precipitously. ie all of your criteria are wrong.
You simply don’t get it. You think I’m afraid of CCP deleting something. I think that when this latest round of “lets make PVE as is these guys were PVPrs” is going to fail, and the content I personally like will be around for another 10 years and CCP ends up scrambling to undo their mistakes.
I’m saying that what they are doing is a waste.
If your players demonstrates (thorough their actions) that they do like missions/anoms/DED complexes/mining/exploration and that (based on their lack of embracing these things) they don’t like Incursions, Drifters, Clone Soldiers, Sleepers, Burners, Mining Operations etc etc, how does it make sense to keep making the stuff they don’t like while ignoring the stuff they do?
I’ve seen this happen over and over again in EVE (I remember all the hype about incursions) and the “pie in the sky” types can never seem to understand why it’s just not going to work they way they hope… History demonstrates how people will act in the future.
2 Likes
I dont see how some NPCs showing up is going to ruin your content.
A) You can work on your standing and be exempt from interference.
B) You can go wreck the FOB.
C) Go elsewhere to run your content as you want it.
D) Do something else, as thousands upon thousands of players have done throughout the evolution of EVE.
There is something extremely hypocritical and ironic about such a self-professed and dedicated PvE player being so upset about CCP trying to improve PvE.
Yes, we understand you want your predictable, min/max PvE content to stay exactly the same. Tough. HTFU and deal with it.
That’s what high-seccers were doing since introduction of Incursions: they were logging off for a week or moving to other mission hub.
Seriously: can someone tell that it was semi-often that regular high-sec mission runners/miners were fleeting up and removing incursion from their constellation? Did it happen ONCE?
Because using Incursion as example this new “incursion2” is wasted effort which would be consumed by 1.5% of playerbase (most of those will switch from original Incursion) and ignored by others.
2 Likes
Depends on the risk/reward of removing the FOB.
1 Like
r/r ratio is bovine fecal matter compared to just go elsewhere and run a few missions more. Specially if you factor time as a part of the risk (opportunity cost).
You know at this point there’s a clear picture in many player’s minds about why EVE haves a lot of PvE players and why PCU is going down as those players leave faster than CCP retains them.
And it all boils down to a single conundrum:
PvE players don’t get what they want.
Nothing less, nothing more.
Nobody cares of FOB. Probably they will be farmed by 1% of players as Incursions are. And if they become a nuisance (which will depend on whether it’s profitable to let them mellow before harvesting), mission runners will just move to their own FOBs until the invasion is over at their HQ system.
They will be ignored/bypassed/farmed by a tiny slice of dedicated farmers. And developing them wil have cost the same, or more, than adding 20 new missions to the roll to freshen it up. Adding more missiosn, DEDs and complexes is a low-ego, large impact development, compared to the large ego for tiny impact AI course of action.
Unfortunately CCP “customer oriented design” is all about CCP’s ego, and not player’s will or needs.
2 Likes
So what do they want, in your opinion.
Quoting myself:
FOB fail to accomplish 1, 2, 4 and 5… and probably 3 too.
1 Like
Null will die of boredom at last. Blue donuts, these new NPC pirates afraid to fly there.
High sec the best space for having fun?
Level 4 missions didn’t originally exist, deds were once statics that were dominated by people taking the keys (as the one gurista ded 1 farmer still does each day since they left the inner keys in the game, and only made the outer keys drop elsewhere). Then they were gatewayed behind an extremely random scanning system where you did the same thing for an hour and hoped the thing popped for you. Afaik X-types didn’t always exist. There was once no burners. there was no once no anomolies to escalate from, and the personal income / player homing capacity of sov null systems was too low (probably too high today in terms of count today, avoiding the income debate).
IMO it took 4 years to get that content iteration right, and from a solo perspective it required the best part of a year of the people like me who went to wormholes to deliver enough t3s to make it all easily budget soloable (and they let t3s make it get too easy).
all I can see is new encounters being useless addendums, or new encounters having new loot and thus causing power creep. Can live without x-type mediums.
I would be perfectly ok if I could miss the running of a ded phase, and just be there for the loot dropping phase - honestly, like 30 battleships of 2 types in a ded 7, its just a long delay to let people find you - and because its so non distracting, I’ve never actually died in a pve escalation runner and people aren’t that motivated to drop probes.
In fact I’m also pretty over anoms, for me, its gun probing that limits exposure to gate jumps and thus camps, and actually pays money when you don’t find anything, and sometimes fountains out ridiculous results like 4 of the perfect escalation in 4 anomolies, but the only thing I’m watching whilst doing them is local and the wave I’m up to if I’m doing one that can spawn a dread.
I don’t understand the issue you have with incursions. CCP plainly limited the number of people that can run them simultaneously - ie the design objective seems to have been to service the number of people they service.
Also, a long time ago I played tabula rasa, they had a mechanic where the mission hubs suffered from invasions, and where you had to assault them to take them back. Everyone was cool with that because it existed before they started playing - in fact for me it was the most enjoyable part of the game.
Also this is no longer a problem for a young character or a hauler, its only going to impact people like my alt that are -10 to gurista - plainly they’ve iterated on the concept of interruption.
They will even kill your pod.
source:http://imgsrc.baidu.com/forum/pic/item/9b8c1f30e924b8991418ee4765061d950b7bf6da.jpg
pod: imgsrc.baidu.com/forum/pic/item/5669e71190ef76c68bec6c549616fdfaae5167c3.jpg
1 Like
hehehe
yeah had that on SISI, lost the ship so sat there and then POP … WTF!
Threadnaught tears will be awesome when this hits TQ.
2 Likes
Finally wont have to go 15 jumps for pve content. It will come to me! Time to be super lazy and never leave the same system.
1 Like
Incursions are high-end content, heavily focused on group play. I don’t think FOBs will needed such commitment.
Why people are so short-sighted. Missions will have to be changed at some point or added eventually. With current mechanics they quickly become stale. It is just scripted content with predictable opponents that don’t interact with sandbox at all and just being slaughtered like sheeps. Devs want to shake that with new AI.
Which one you choose:
-
Defence mission - corporation is asking player to defend their mining fleet. You warp to mining site. Orca and 4 barges in it. Blood raiders shows up and tackle mining fleet. Player must kill attackers quick enough to save fleet or kills tacklers so fleet can warp off. Payout will be determined how many ships was saved. Barges are not close to each other. Do you have enough time to save Orca? Sacrifice a barge maybe? Spawns are random and in random locations.
-
Defence mission - warp to site, kill everything on grid, triggers calls next wave, warp out, cash in - that what is the level of interaction now.
Missions really need refreshing, they are old, but CCP need new AI for that.
1 Like
Sounds more real, but I guess it will take many years to become a new PVE meta at best.
+1
What irks me is that they can’t see it coming.
It reminds me of Dominion SOV. CCP said a lot of thing that turned out to not happen (like how it would all be great for 'small groups that want a foot hold in null" lol). The…overly optimistic types bought it, and sprinkle in a healthy dose of grr goons (the idea was that Dominion SOV would screw over Goons…I’m still LOLing years later).
But the end result was years of Goon and big group domination, and the small groups did get a foothold in null…as renters…
The problem occurs I think because overly optimistic types are unable to be truly critical about a thing, preferring instead to see the best possible outcome. This keeps them from being able to learn for the past, and leaves them blind sided when reality strikes.
You (March Rabbit) and I both know that if FOBs are worth the time they will be dominated by small groups of moslty null sec/WH space players using alts (like Incursions are) that freeze out high sec players, and if they aren’t worth it they will just be festering spots in space people ignore as they fly through.
Either way , it will probably represent the latest batch of wasted DEV time. I can’t get the question out of my head: how many times does this have to happen before someone ‘gets it’?
6 Likes
Add more points to that “must be” table of yours, currently it is not enough to “rotfl” only for “lol”. chitchatting rewards…
Fact 1: they screwed up the delivery & application of WIS & it died.
Fact 2: there was a very vocal but small (& I believe unrepresentative of the bulk of the player base) crowd who didn’t want it & shouted long & hard for it to go away.
Those two facts don’t actually (as you seem to think?) have any real causal connection.
It died because it was released on a dying platform, it was released on a dying platform in return for development cash, it was (iirc?) always intended as a tool to develop the in-house skills to produce a proper one at a later date (?) … so that was a reasonable choice given those intentions of CCP’s.
Further, the main problem with WIS was it was over hyped & failed to deliver anything approaching what people thought was promised … going on from that … 99.99% of the anger & protest about WIS (when there was any) was that it wasn’t as good as promised not because no one wanted it.
So crowing about “we were right it was crap & no one wanted it” (which is how that part of your post translates to me?) is out of place & incorrect, your wrong… most players did want it & still do.
2 Likes